Escue v. Rasmussen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Escue v. Rasmussen

285 A.D. 1184, 143 N.Y.S.2d 608, 1955 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7097

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 31, 1955

StatusPublished

This text of 285 A.D. 1184 (Escue v. Rasmussen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Escue v. Rasmussen, 285 A.D. 1184, 143 N.Y.S.2d 608, 1955 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7097 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1955).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover moneys expended for necessaries for defendant’s children, including legal services, defendant appeals from an order denying his motion to dismiss each of the three causes of action contained in the amended complaint, on the ground that none states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, pursuant to rule 106 of the Rules of Civil Practice, or, in the alternative, to require plaintiffs separately to state and number the facts constituting the [1185]*1185first two causes of action, pursuant to rule 90 of the Rules of Civil Practice. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Wenzel, Acting P. J., MacCrate, Schmidt, Beldock and Murphy, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In an action to recover moneys expended for necessaries for defendant’s children, including legal services, defendant appeals from an order denying his motion to dismiss each of the three causes of action contained in the amended complaint, on the ground that none states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, pursuant to rule 106 of the Rules of Civil Practice, or, in the alternative, to require plaintiffs separately to state and number the facts constituting the [1185]*1185first two causes of action, pursuant to rule 90 of the Rules of Civil Practice. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Wenzel, Acting P. J., MacCrate, Schmidt, Beldock and Murphy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

285 A.D. 1184, 143 N.Y.S.2d 608, 1955 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7097, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/escue-v-rasmussen-nyappdiv-1955.